Mar
2
2010
Poor Wayfaring Man
Here is another example of LDS Church leaders retiring unwanted doctrine by playing with the concepts of “policy” and “doctrine” in order to avoid violating LDS stare decisis.
Despite early acceptance of black men into the LDS priesthood, the Church, beginning with Brigham Young in at least 1852 (and possibly earlier, with Joseph Smith), taught for more than 100 years that black people bore the Mark of Cain, which labeled them as a cursed and disfavored people in the eyes of God, and unable, therefore, to be part of the LDS priesthood. Continue reading
2 comments | tags: Brigham Young, Curse of Ham, David O. McKay, general authorities, General Conference, Gordon B. Hinckley, Jeffrey R. Holland, Joseph Smith, LDS Church Policy, LDS legalism, LDS morals and ethics, Mark of Cain, Mormon Doctrine, Mormon History, PBS documentary, policy vs. doctrine, Priesthood, priesthood authority, prophets, racism, Sterling McMurrin, Wilford Woodruff | posted in List Item 01, List Item 03, List Item 07, List Item 11, List Item 12, List Item 13, List Item 16, List Item 18, List Item 19, List Item 21, List Item 22, List Item 23, Mormon Culture, Mormon Doctrine
Mar
1
2010
Poor Wayfaring Man
Here is an example of LDS Church leaders retiring unwanted doctrine by playing with the concepts of “policy” and “doctrine”, and then making overtures of respect to the originators of that doctrine, in order to avoid violating LDS stare decisis.
In the nineteenth century, leaders of the Church taught that the practice of polygamy was an inextricable doctrine of Mormonism, and the only way to reach the highest levels of heaven. Continue reading
3 comments | tags: Authority, Brigham Young, doublespeak, Gordon B. Hinckley, Heber C. Kimball, John Taylor, Joseph F. Smith, Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, Larry King, LDS Church Policy, LDS legalism, Mormon Doctrine, Mormon History, policy vs. doctrine, polygamy, priesthood authority, prophets, spin, stare decisis | posted in List Item 07, List Item 11, List Item 13, List Item 19, List Item 21, List Item 23, List Item 24, Mormon Culture, Mormon Doctrine
Feb
24
2010
Poor Wayfaring Man
The legalistic aspects of Mormonism are fascinating to me. Here is one.
Stare decisis is a legal concept meant to establish consistency in decisions made by courts. The idea is that once a decision has been made by a court about a certain point of law, future courts should respect that decision and follow suit. This approach conserves judicial resources by obviating the need for people to bring the same legal dispute to court over and over again, because they can look at past cases and reliably predict what a court is going to say about the issue. It also causes people to take more seriously the decisions of current courts, because today’s decisions are going to hold weight with other courts in the future. Thus, it is a way for courts to legitimize their own decisions by respecting the decisions of their predecessors. Stare decisis is a practical strategy for dealing with the fact that reasonable judges will disagree about what the law means, and even though it sometimes enshrines erroneous decisions into the law, it is generally considered a useful and effective element of the judicial system.
A similar concept is at work for the top leaders of the LDS Church (considered “prophets, seers, and revelators” by believing members of the faith), though the process goes largely unacknowledged. Continue reading
no comments | tags: LDS Church Policy, LDS legalism, Mormon Doctrine, policy vs. doctrine, prophets, stare decisis | posted in List Item 07, List Item 11, List Item 19, List Item 21, List Item 23, Mormon Culture, Mormon Doctrine